OT – Joe the Plumber

[luchabee]

“I’ve heard enough about this Joe the Plumber character. I guess he is supposed to embody the middle class or something. And whoever heard of a plumber who works 10-12 hour days 7 days a week? What a crock of shit.”

That’s strange. I thought you owned your own business, thebreeze? You don’t work those hours?

FWIW, my dad is not a plumber, but an electrician, and he works pretty close to those hours, running his own business . . . sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less (but not often). He has been working these hours for about 10 years.

He doesn’t make anywhere close to $250,000 (probably $60,000 net), so he will not be affected by Obama’s plan or have to lay off people for this new proposed spending. Unfortunately, he had to let his two employees go a long time ago as it wasn’t profitable enough to keep them with all the taxes, paperwork, and insurance and they were too slow and barely employable. Don’t worry, though, we probably are paying their social security and unemployment now, so they are all taken care of.

It comes down to this, if liberals were ever forced to run their own business for one year(and I know that you do, from what you said) and subsist on their earnings, 75% of them would instantly become Republicans.

Really, Obama’s plan if enacted (God help us) would be like feeding rat poison to a patient in intensive care.

Yes, maybe some will get a nice tax-cut or tax credit for a few hundred dollars (maybe a thousand!), but their jobs will be gone to pay for these ridiculous spending programs.

Personally, I’d rather have a job, but that’s just me.

[Coronita]

More “spreading the wealth” concepts…

Remember this one in the headlines?..This one gets the cake….

Thank god this was dismissed. Unfortunately, the small biz didn’t survive.

Again, where are the liberal Democrats demanding justice for this outrage? What happens when a minority frivolously sues an immigrant. Oh wait, those are asian immigrants. We really don’t give rats ass about them….

Note: the judge is now suing D.C. for being wrongfully dismissed. Go figure.

I’ve got several hundred other examples to boot that I routinely archive.

As a small biz owner, I wonder if we’re going to start seeing a lot more of this sort of shit.

—–

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18471265/
http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2007/05/roy_pearson_is_an_id.html

Judge: Cleaner owes me $65 million for pants
2 years of litigation x 1 pair of trousers = headaches for family business

WASHINGTON – The Chungs, immigrants from South Korea, realized their American dream when they opened their dry-cleaning business seven years ago in the nation’s capital.

For the past two years, however, they’ve been dealing with the nightmare of litigation: a $65 million lawsuit over a pair of missing pants.

Jin Nam Chung, Ki Chung and their son, Soo Chung, are so disheartened that they’re considering moving back to Seoul, said their attorney, Chris Manning, who spoke on their behalf.

“They’re out a lot of money, but more importantly, incredibly disenchanted with the system,” Manning said. “This has destroyed their lives.”

The lawsuit was filed by a District of Columbia administrative hearings judge, Roy Pearson, who has been representing himself in the case.

Pearson said he could not comment on the case.

According to court documents, the problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alteration to Custom Cleaners in Northeast Washington, a place he patronized regularly despite previous disagreements with the Chungs. A pair of pants from one suit was not ready when he requested it two days later, and was deemed to be missing.

Pearson asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit: more than $1,000.

But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found and refused to pay. That’s when Pearson decided to sue.

Three settlement offers
Manning said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson. First they offered $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000. But Pearson wasn’t satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants.

Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, part of his lawsuit calls for $15,000 — the price to rent a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

“He’s somehow purporting that he has a constitutional right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment,” Manning said.

But the bulk of the $65 million comes from Pearson’s strict interpretation of D.C.’s consumer protection law, which fines violators $1,500 per violation, per day. According to court papers, Pearson added up 12 violations over 1,200 days, and then multiplied that by three defendants.

Much of Pearson’s case rests on two signs that Custom Cleaners once had on its walls: “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and “Same Day Service.”

Judge alleges fraud
Based on Pearson’s dissatisfaction and the delay in getting back the pants, he claims the signs amount to fraud.

Pearson has appointed himself to represent all customers affected by such signs, though D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz, who will hear the June 11 trial, has said that this is a case about one plaintiff, and one pair of pants.

Sherman Joyce, president of the American Tort Association, has written a letter to the group of men who will decide this week whether to renew Pearson’s 10-year appointment. Joyce is asking them to reconsider.

Chief Administrative Judge Tyrone Butler had no comment regarding Pearson’s reappointment.

The association, which tries to police the kind of abusive lawsuits that hurt small businesses, also has offered to buy Pearson the suit of his choice.

Support for the defendants
And former National Labor Relations Board chief administrative law judge Melvin Welles wrote to The Washington Post to urge “any bar to which Mr. Pearson belongs to immediately disbar him and the District to remove him from his position as an administrative law judge.”

“There has been a significant groundswell of support for the Chungs,” said Manning, adding that plans for a defense fund Web site are in the works.

To the Chungs and their attorney, one of the most frustrating aspects of the case is their claim that Pearson’s gray pants were found a week after Pearson dropped them off in 2005. They’ve been hanging in Manning’s office for more than a year.

Pearson claims in court documents that his pants had blue and red pinstripes.

“They match his inseam measurements. The ticket on the pants match his receipt,” Manning said.

[Coronita]

More “spreading the wealth” concepts…

Remember this one in the headlines?..This one gets the cake….

Thank god this was dismissed. Unfortunately, the small biz didn’t survive.

Again, where are the liberal Democrats demanding justice for this outrage? What happens when a minority frivolously sues an immigrant. Oh wait, those are asian immigrants. We really don’t give rats ass about them….

Note: the judge is now suing D.C. for being wrongfully dismissed. Go figure.

I’ve got several hundred other examples to boot that I routinely archive.

As a small biz owner, I wonder if we’re going to start seeing a lot more of this sort of shit.

—–

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18471265/
http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2007/05/roy_pearson_is_an_id.html

Judge: Cleaner owes me $65 million for pants
2 years of litigation x 1 pair of trousers = headaches for family business

WASHINGTON – The Chungs, immigrants from South Korea, realized their American dream when they opened their dry-cleaning business seven years ago in the nation’s capital.

For the past two years, however, they’ve been dealing with the nightmare of litigation: a $65 million lawsuit over a pair of missing pants.

Jin Nam Chung, Ki Chung and their son, Soo Chung, are so disheartened that they’re considering moving back to Seoul, said their attorney, Chris Manning, who spoke on their behalf.

“They’re out a lot of money, but more importantly, incredibly disenchanted with the system,” Manning said. “This has destroyed their lives.”

The lawsuit was filed by a District of Columbia administrative hearings judge, Roy Pearson, who has been representing himself in the case.

Pearson said he could not comment on the case.

According to court documents, the problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alteration to Custom Cleaners in Northeast Washington, a place he patronized regularly despite previous disagreements with the Chungs. A pair of pants from one suit was not ready when he requested it two days later, and was deemed to be missing.

Pearson asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit: more than $1,000.

But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found and refused to pay. That’s when Pearson decided to sue.

Three settlement offers
Manning said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson. First they offered $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000. But Pearson wasn’t satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants.

Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, part of his lawsuit calls for $15,000 — the price to rent a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

“He’s somehow purporting that he has a constitutional right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment,” Manning said.

But the bulk of the $65 million comes from Pearson’s strict interpretation of D.C.’s consumer protection law, which fines violators $1,500 per violation, per day. According to court papers, Pearson added up 12 violations over 1,200 days, and then multiplied that by three defendants.

Much of Pearson’s case rests on two signs that Custom Cleaners once had on its walls: “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and “Same Day Service.”

Judge alleges fraud
Based on Pearson’s dissatisfaction and the delay in getting back the pants, he claims the signs amount to fraud.

Pearson has appointed himself to represent all customers affected by such signs, though D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz, who will hear the June 11 trial, has said that this is a case about one plaintiff, and one pair of pants.

Sherman Joyce, president of the American Tort Association, has written a letter to the group of men who will decide this week whether to renew Pearson’s 10-year appointment. Joyce is asking them to reconsider.

Chief Administrative Judge Tyrone Butler had no comment regarding Pearson’s reappointment.

The association, which tries to police the kind of abusive lawsuits that hurt small businesses, also has offered to buy Pearson the suit of his choice.

Support for the defendants
And former National Labor Relations Board chief administrative law judge Melvin Welles wrote to The Washington Post to urge “any bar to which Mr. Pearson belongs to immediately disbar him and the District to remove him from his position as an administrative law judge.”

“There has been a significant groundswell of support for the Chungs,” said Manning, adding that plans for a defense fund Web site are in the works.

To the Chungs and their attorney, one of the most frustrating aspects of the case is their claim that Pearson’s gray pants were found a week after Pearson dropped them off in 2005. They’ve been hanging in Manning’s office for more than a year.

Pearson claims in court documents that his pants had blue and red pinstripes.

“They match his inseam measurements. The ticket on the pants match his receipt,” Manning said.

[Coronita]

More “spreading the wealth” concepts…

Remember this one in the headlines?..This one gets the cake….

Thank god this was dismissed. Unfortunately, the small biz didn’t survive.

Again, where are the liberal Democrats demanding justice for this outrage? What happens when a minority frivolously sues an immigrant. Oh wait, those are asian immigrants. We really don’t give rats ass about them….

Note: the judge is now suing D.C. for being wrongfully dismissed. Go figure.

I’ve got several hundred other examples to boot that I routinely archive.

As a small biz owner, I wonder if we’re going to start seeing a lot more of this sort of shit.

—–

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18471265/
http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2007/05/roy_pearson_is_an_id.html

Judge: Cleaner owes me $65 million for pants
2 years of litigation x 1 pair of trousers = headaches for family business

WASHINGTON – The Chungs, immigrants from South Korea, realized their American dream when they opened their dry-cleaning business seven years ago in the nation’s capital.

For the past two years, however, they’ve been dealing with the nightmare of litigation: a $65 million lawsuit over a pair of missing pants.

Jin Nam Chung, Ki Chung and their son, Soo Chung, are so disheartened that they’re considering moving back to Seoul, said their attorney, Chris Manning, who spoke on their behalf.

“They’re out a lot of money, but more importantly, incredibly disenchanted with the system,” Manning said. “This has destroyed their lives.”

The lawsuit was filed by a District of Columbia administrative hearings judge, Roy Pearson, who has been representing himself in the case.

Pearson said he could not comment on the case.

According to court documents, the problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alteration to Custom Cleaners in Northeast Washington, a place he patronized regularly despite previous disagreements with the Chungs. A pair of pants from one suit was not ready when he requested it two days later, and was deemed to be missing.

Pearson asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit: more than $1,000.

But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found and refused to pay. That’s when Pearson decided to sue.

Three settlement offers
Manning said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson. First they offered $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000. But Pearson wasn’t satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants.

Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, part of his lawsuit calls for $15,000 — the price to rent a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

“He’s somehow purporting that he has a constitutional right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment,” Manning said.

But the bulk of the $65 million comes from Pearson’s strict interpretation of D.C.’s consumer protection law, which fines violators $1,500 per violation, per day. According to court papers, Pearson added up 12 violations over 1,200 days, and then multiplied that by three defendants.

Much of Pearson’s case rests on two signs that Custom Cleaners once had on its walls: “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and “Same Day Service.”

Judge alleges fraud
Based on Pearson’s dissatisfaction and the delay in getting back the pants, he claims the signs amount to fraud.

Pearson has appointed himself to represent all customers affected by such signs, though D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz, who will hear the June 11 trial, has said that this is a case about one plaintiff, and one pair of pants.

Sherman Joyce, president of the American Tort Association, has written a letter to the group of men who will decide this week whether to renew Pearson’s 10-year appointment. Joyce is asking them to reconsider.

Chief Administrative Judge Tyrone Butler had no comment regarding Pearson’s reappointment.

The association, which tries to police the kind of abusive lawsuits that hurt small businesses, also has offered to buy Pearson the suit of his choice.

Support for the defendants
And former National Labor Relations Board chief administrative law judge Melvin Welles wrote to The Washington Post to urge “any bar to which Mr. Pearson belongs to immediately disbar him and the District to remove him from his position as an administrative law judge.”

“There has been a significant groundswell of support for the Chungs,” said Manning, adding that plans for a defense fund Web site are in the works.

To the Chungs and their attorney, one of the most frustrating aspects of the case is their claim that Pearson’s gray pants were found a week after Pearson dropped them off in 2005. They’ve been hanging in Manning’s office for more than a year.

Pearson claims in court documents that his pants had blue and red pinstripes.

“They match his inseam measurements. The ticket on the pants match his receipt,” Manning said.

[Coronita]

More “spreading the wealth” concepts…

Remember this one in the headlines?..This one gets the cake….

Thank god this was dismissed. Unfortunately, the small biz didn’t survive.

Again, where are the liberal Democrats demanding justice for this outrage? What happens when a minority frivolously sues an immigrant. Oh wait, those are asian immigrants. We really don’t give rats ass about them….

Note: the judge is now suing D.C. for being wrongfully dismissed. Go figure.

I’ve got several hundred other examples to boot that I routinely archive.

As a small biz owner, I wonder if we’re going to start seeing a lot more of this sort of shit.

—–

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18471265/
http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2007/05/roy_pearson_is_an_id.html

Judge: Cleaner owes me $65 million for pants
2 years of litigation x 1 pair of trousers = headaches for family business

WASHINGTON – The Chungs, immigrants from South Korea, realized their American dream when they opened their dry-cleaning business seven years ago in the nation’s capital.

For the past two years, however, they’ve been dealing with the nightmare of litigation: a $65 million lawsuit over a pair of missing pants.

Jin Nam Chung, Ki Chung and their son, Soo Chung, are so disheartened that they’re considering moving back to Seoul, said their attorney, Chris Manning, who spoke on their behalf.

“They’re out a lot of money, but more importantly, incredibly disenchanted with the system,” Manning said. “This has destroyed their lives.”

The lawsuit was filed by a District of Columbia administrative hearings judge, Roy Pearson, who has been representing himself in the case.

Pearson said he could not comment on the case.

According to court documents, the problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alteration to Custom Cleaners in Northeast Washington, a place he patronized regularly despite previous disagreements with the Chungs. A pair of pants from one suit was not ready when he requested it two days later, and was deemed to be missing.

Pearson asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit: more than $1,000.

But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found and refused to pay. That’s when Pearson decided to sue.

Three settlement offers
Manning said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson. First they offered $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000. But Pearson wasn’t satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants.

Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, part of his lawsuit calls for $15,000 — the price to rent a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

“He’s somehow purporting that he has a constitutional right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment,” Manning said.

But the bulk of the $65 million comes from Pearson’s strict interpretation of D.C.’s consumer protection law, which fines violators $1,500 per violation, per day. According to court papers, Pearson added up 12 violations over 1,200 days, and then multiplied that by three defendants.

Much of Pearson’s case rests on two signs that Custom Cleaners once had on its walls: “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and “Same Day Service.”

Judge alleges fraud
Based on Pearson’s dissatisfaction and the delay in getting back the pants, he claims the signs amount to fraud.

Pearson has appointed himself to represent all customers affected by such signs, though D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz, who will hear the June 11 trial, has said that this is a case about one plaintiff, and one pair of pants.

Sherman Joyce, president of the American Tort Association, has written a letter to the group of men who will decide this week whether to renew Pearson’s 10-year appointment. Joyce is asking them to reconsider.

Chief Administrative Judge Tyrone Butler had no comment regarding Pearson’s reappointment.

The association, which tries to police the kind of abusive lawsuits that hurt small businesses, also has offered to buy Pearson the suit of his choice.

Support for the defendants
And former National Labor Relations Board chief administrative law judge Melvin Welles wrote to The Washington Post to urge “any bar to which Mr. Pearson belongs to immediately disbar him and the District to remove him from his position as an administrative law judge.”

“There has been a significant groundswell of support for the Chungs,” said Manning, adding that plans for a defense fund Web site are in the works.

To the Chungs and their attorney, one of the most frustrating aspects of the case is their claim that Pearson’s gray pants were found a week after Pearson dropped them off in 2005. They’ve been hanging in Manning’s office for more than a year.

Pearson claims in court documents that his pants had blue and red pinstripes.

“They match his inseam measurements. The ticket on the pants match his receipt,” Manning said.

[Coronita]

More “spreading the wealth” concepts…

Remember this one in the headlines?..This one gets the cake….

Thank god this was dismissed. Unfortunately, the small biz didn’t survive.

Again, where are the liberal Democrats demanding justice for this outrage? What happens when a minority frivolously sues an immigrant. Oh wait, those are asian immigrants. We really don’t give rats ass about them….

Note: the judge is now suing D.C. for being wrongfully dismissed. Go figure.

I’ve got several hundred other examples to boot that I routinely archive.

As a small biz owner, I wonder if we’re going to start seeing a lot more of this sort of shit.

—–

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18471265/
http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2007/05/roy_pearson_is_an_id.html

Judge: Cleaner owes me $65 million for pants
2 years of litigation x 1 pair of trousers = headaches for family business

WASHINGTON – The Chungs, immigrants from South Korea, realized their American dream when they opened their dry-cleaning business seven years ago in the nation’s capital.

For the past two years, however, they’ve been dealing with the nightmare of litigation: a $65 million lawsuit over a pair of missing pants.

Jin Nam Chung, Ki Chung and their son, Soo Chung, are so disheartened that they’re considering moving back to Seoul, said their attorney, Chris Manning, who spoke on their behalf.

“They’re out a lot of money, but more importantly, incredibly disenchanted with the system,” Manning said. “This has destroyed their lives.”

The lawsuit was filed by a District of Columbia administrative hearings judge, Roy Pearson, who has been representing himself in the case.

Pearson said he could not comment on the case.

According to court documents, the problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alteration to Custom Cleaners in Northeast Washington, a place he patronized regularly despite previous disagreements with the Chungs. A pair of pants from one suit was not ready when he requested it two days later, and was deemed to be missing.

Pearson asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit: more than $1,000.

But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found and refused to pay. That’s when Pearson decided to sue.

Three settlement offers
Manning said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson. First they offered $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000. But Pearson wasn’t satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants.

Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, part of his lawsuit calls for $15,000 — the price to rent a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

“He’s somehow purporting that he has a constitutional right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment,” Manning said.

But the bulk of the $65 million comes from Pearson’s strict interpretation of D.C.’s consumer protection law, which fines violators $1,500 per violation, per day. According to court papers, Pearson added up 12 violations over 1,200 days, and then multiplied that by three defendants.

Much of Pearson’s case rests on two signs that Custom Cleaners once had on its walls: “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and “Same Day Service.”

Judge alleges fraud
Based on Pearson’s dissatisfaction and the delay in getting back the pants, he claims the signs amount to fraud.

Pearson has appointed himself to represent all customers affected by such signs, though D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz, who will hear the June 11 trial, has said that this is a case about one plaintiff, and one pair of pants.

Sherman Joyce, president of the American Tort Association, has written a letter to the group of men who will decide this week whether to renew Pearson’s 10-year appointment. Joyce is asking them to reconsider.

Chief Administrative Judge Tyrone Butler had no comment regarding Pearson’s reappointment.

The association, which tries to police the kind of abusive lawsuits that hurt small businesses, also has offered to buy Pearson the suit of his choice.

Support for the defendants
And former National Labor Relations Board chief administrative law judge Melvin Welles wrote to The Washington Post to urge “any bar to which Mr. Pearson belongs to immediately disbar him and the District to remove him from his position as an administrative law judge.”

“There has been a significant groundswell of support for the Chungs,” said Manning, adding that plans for a defense fund Web site are in the works.

To the Chungs and their attorney, one of the most frustrating aspects of the case is their claim that Pearson’s gray pants were found a week after Pearson dropped them off in 2005. They’ve been hanging in Manning’s office for more than a year.

Pearson claims in court documents that his pants had blue and red pinstripes.

“They match his inseam measurements. The ticket on the pants match his receipt,” Manning said.

[Aecetia]

Flu, all your points are valid. I love your passion and how you stick up for your mother. Good for you. Some of the public school morons need icons to assist them make change. I can call them that because I am a public school moron, but I went years ago, before the teachers’ unions completely dumbed down the classrooms. I do not think Affirmative Action helped women either. It just fomented gender warfare. Also, your point about who should be helped is 100% correct, it should not be racial, but for those in need regardless of race. Wake up America. Obama’s statistical sleight of hand regarding who would get a tax break is more of his obscene propaganda. Goebel’s would be proud of the lies he constantly spins fed by an unending stream of small untraceable donations. This is not really about politics for me, it is about which candidate will hurt my family more and it is clearly Obama. BTW, my husband is 50% Asian (Japanese mother, American father). Affirmative action never assisted him one iota.

“Again, why oh why, is mainstream America pinning things like affirmative action on us is beyond me? I would fully support a more fairer system that was more based on economic need,irrespective or race. My rationale is some Caucasian from rural south community that probably never sent folks to college would have the same consideration for an ‘affirmative action’ as some African American or Latino from the inner city. In my mind, if these social policies are really meant for giving ‘less fortunate people’ more opportunity, they need to be unilaterally applied irrespective of race.”

It should be to each according to their need (for monetary assistance, even with low interest grants) and not their race. And jobs should be according to their ability and based on merit not on some differential quota designed to assuage white (liberal) guilt over slavery. Spreading the wealth does not a healthy economy make. Smart businessmen and the rich will always find their way around the rules and will stay rich The middle class will suffer and may well decide it is not worth working to pay for those who do not wish to work. Remember the small farms in the old Soviet Union far outproduced the collective ones. It is the invisible hand at work. The invisible hand of self-interest.

[Aecetia]

Flu, all your points are valid. I love your passion and how you stick up for your mother. Good for you. Some of the public school morons need icons to assist them make change. I can call them that because I am a public school moron, but I went years ago, before the teachers’ unions completely dumbed down the classrooms. I do not think Affirmative Action helped women either. It just fomented gender warfare. Also, your point about who should be helped is 100% correct, it should not be racial, but for those in need regardless of race. Wake up America. Obama’s statistical sleight of hand regarding who would get a tax break is more of his obscene propaganda. Goebel’s would be proud of the lies he constantly spins fed by an unending stream of small untraceable donations. This is not really about politics for me, it is about which candidate will hurt my family more and it is clearly Obama. BTW, my husband is 50% Asian (Japanese mother, American father). Affirmative action never assisted him one iota.

“Again, why oh why, is mainstream America pinning things like affirmative action on us is beyond me? I would fully support a more fairer system that was more based on economic need,irrespective or race. My rationale is some Caucasian from rural south community that probably never sent folks to college would have the same consideration for an ‘affirmative action’ as some African American or Latino from the inner city. In my mind, if these social policies are really meant for giving ‘less fortunate people’ more opportunity, they need to be unilaterally applied irrespective of race.”

It should be to each according to their need (for monetary assistance, even with low interest grants) and not their race. And jobs should be according to their ability and based on merit not on some differential quota designed to assuage white (liberal) guilt over slavery. Spreading the wealth does not a healthy economy make. Smart businessmen and the rich will always find their way around the rules and will stay rich The middle class will suffer and may well decide it is not worth working to pay for those who do not wish to work. Remember the small farms in the old Soviet Union far outproduced the collective ones. It is the invisible hand at work. The invisible hand of self-interest.

[Aecetia]

Flu, all your points are valid. I love your passion and how you stick up for your mother. Good for you. Some of the public school morons need icons to assist them make change. I can call them that because I am a public school moron, but I went years ago, before the teachers’ unions completely dumbed down the classrooms. I do not think Affirmative Action helped women either. It just fomented gender warfare. Also, your point about who should be helped is 100% correct, it should not be racial, but for those in need regardless of race. Wake up America. Obama’s statistical sleight of hand regarding who would get a tax break is more of his obscene propaganda. Goebel’s would be proud of the lies he constantly spins fed by an unending stream of small untraceable donations. This is not really about politics for me, it is about which candidate will hurt my family more and it is clearly Obama. BTW, my husband is 50% Asian (Japanese mother, American father). Affirmative action never assisted him one iota.

“Again, why oh why, is mainstream America pinning things like affirmative action on us is beyond me? I would fully support a more fairer system that was more based on economic need,irrespective or race. My rationale is some Caucasian from rural south community that probably never sent folks to college would have the same consideration for an ‘affirmative action’ as some African American or Latino from the inner city. In my mind, if these social policies are really meant for giving ‘less fortunate people’ more opportunity, they need to be unilaterally applied irrespective of race.”

It should be to each according to their need (for monetary assistance, even with low interest grants) and not their race. And jobs should be according to their ability and based on merit not on some differential quota designed to assuage white (liberal) guilt over slavery. Spreading the wealth does not a healthy economy make. Smart businessmen and the rich will always find their way around the rules and will stay rich The middle class will suffer and may well decide it is not worth working to pay for those who do not wish to work. Remember the small farms in the old Soviet Union far outproduced the collective ones. It is the invisible hand at work. The invisible hand of self-interest.

[Aecetia]

Flu, all your points are valid. I love your passion and how you stick up for your mother. Good for you. Some of the public school morons need icons to assist them make change. I can call them that because I am a public school moron, but I went years ago, before the teachers’ unions completely dumbed down the classrooms. I do not think Affirmative Action helped women either. It just fomented gender warfare. Also, your point about who should be helped is 100% correct, it should not be racial, but for those in need regardless of race. Wake up America. Obama’s statistical sleight of hand regarding who would get a tax break is more of his obscene propaganda. Goebel’s would be proud of the lies he constantly spins fed by an unending stream of small untraceable donations. This is not really about politics for me, it is about which candidate will hurt my family more and it is clearly Obama. BTW, my husband is 50% Asian (Japanese mother, American father). Affirmative action never assisted him one iota.

“Again, why oh why, is mainstream America pinning things like affirmative action on us is beyond me? I would fully support a more fairer system that was more based on economic need,irrespective or race. My rationale is some Caucasian from rural south community that probably never sent folks to college would have the same consideration for an ‘affirmative action’ as some African American or Latino from the inner city. In my mind, if these social policies are really meant for giving ‘less fortunate people’ more opportunity, they need to be unilaterally applied irrespective of race.”

It should be to each according to their need (for monetary assistance, even with low interest grants) and not their race. And jobs should be according to their ability and based on merit not on some differential quota designed to assuage white (liberal) guilt over slavery. Spreading the wealth does not a healthy economy make. Smart businessmen and the rich will always find their way around the rules and will stay rich The middle class will suffer and may well decide it is not worth working to pay for those who do not wish to work. Remember the small farms in the old Soviet Union far outproduced the collective ones. It is the invisible hand at work. The invisible hand of self-interest.

[Aecetia]

Flu, all your points are valid. I love your passion and how you stick up for your mother. Good for you. Some of the public school morons need icons to assist them make change. I can call them that because I am a public school moron, but I went years ago, before the teachers’ unions completely dumbed down the classrooms. I do not think Affirmative Action helped women either. It just fomented gender warfare. Also, your point about who should be helped is 100% correct, it should not be racial, but for those in need regardless of race. Wake up America. Obama’s statistical sleight of hand regarding who would get a tax break is more of his obscene propaganda. Goebel’s would be proud of the lies he constantly spins fed by an unending stream of small untraceable donations. This is not really about politics for me, it is about which candidate will hurt my family more and it is clearly Obama. BTW, my husband is 50% Asian (Japanese mother, American father). Affirmative action never assisted him one iota.

“Again, why oh why, is mainstream America pinning things like affirmative action on us is beyond me? I would fully support a more fairer system that was more based on economic need,irrespective or race. My rationale is some Caucasian from rural south community that probably never sent folks to college would have the same consideration for an ‘affirmative action’ as some African American or Latino from the inner city. In my mind, if these social policies are really meant for giving ‘less fortunate people’ more opportunity, they need to be unilaterally applied irrespective of race.”

It should be to each according to their need (for monetary assistance, even with low interest grants) and not their race. And jobs should be according to their ability and based on merit not on some differential quota designed to assuage white (liberal) guilt over slavery. Spreading the wealth does not a healthy economy make. Smart businessmen and the rich will always find their way around the rules and will stay rich The middle class will suffer and may well decide it is not worth working to pay for those who do not wish to work. Remember the small farms in the old Soviet Union far outproduced the collective ones. It is the invisible hand at work. The invisible hand of self-interest.

[Coronita]

Still waiting for any asian american “liberal” democrat to answer these basic questions of inequality on some of these more “spreading the wealth policies”. Please, chime in on affirmative action, and tell me you benefited from them or at least weren’t hurt by such policies…..Dead silence?….I thought so…

[Coronita]

Still waiting for any asian american “liberal” democrat to answer these basic questions of inequality on some of these more “spreading the wealth policies”. Please, chime in on affirmative action, and tell me you benefited from them or at least weren’t hurt by such policies…..Dead silence?….I thought so…

[Coronita]

Still waiting for any asian american “liberal” democrat to answer these basic questions of inequality on some of these more “spreading the wealth policies”. Please, chime in on affirmative action, and tell me you benefited from them or at least weren’t hurt by such policies…..Dead silence?….I thought so…

[Coronita]

Still waiting for any asian american “liberal” democrat to answer these basic questions of inequality on some of these more “spreading the wealth policies”. Please, chime in on affirmative action, and tell me you benefited from them or at least weren’t hurt by such policies…..Dead silence?….I thought so…

[Author]

Posts